7
PROCTOR | September 2015
News
A broader view of specialist courts
Letter
In 2014 the former LNP Government,
aware of the problem which domestic
violence poses in our community, set
up a commission, headed by Dame
Quentin Bryce, to look broadly at
measures which could be introduced
to deal with this serious issue.
The commission’s report, Not Now, Not
Ever, was handed down earlier this year. It
recommended the establishment of specialist
domestic and family violence courts, with
specialist magistrates. The recommendation
was to “ensure that the complexities and
nuances of domestic and family violence
are appropriately taken into consideration.
Properly trained and dedicated Magistrates
will be able to provide fairer, and safer
outcomes for victims.”
While the Opposition understands the
reason for this recommendation, it has some
concerns around how the concept of a
specialist court might work out in practice.
Dame Heather Hallett, deputy chair of the
Queen’s Bench Division in England, addressed
this year’s Bar Association of Queensland
Conference on the Gold Coast on the pros
and cons of specialisation – be that on the
bench, or at the Bar, or in the solicitor’s office.
It was a fascinating look at how specialisation
on the one hand can sharpen expertise, but
on the other hand can deliver a narrow view of
the law (and the world) to the detriment of the
practitioner and the community she/he serves.
As a practitioner in the planning jurisdiction
over many years, I experienced the pluses
and minuses of a specialist planning court.
On the one hand there was great benefit in
cases proceeding ‘in shorthand’ – with no
need to cover the basics – just an ability to
jump right in and get expertly to the nub of
the matter. On the other hand I was aware of
the undoubted ‘clubiness’ of the jurisdiction
– making it comfortable and efficient for
regulars but daunting and difficult for those
not practising there often.
Given the subject matter of domestic violence
courts, I have an uneasy feeling that a court
(and magistrates) dedicated exclusively to
this area could become comfortable or even
blasé within a ‘cocooned court’, and that
insulating them from mainstream legal work
could eventually add an air of unreality
to the jurisdiction.
To go back to the Planning and Environment
Court model, I think there is wisdom in the
practice of judges of that court also having
exposure to the regular work of the District
Court – allowing them to develop the relevant
expertise, but keeping them grounded in
broader practice areas at the same time.
For this reason I wonder if we should examine
a model in which a domestic violence division
of the Magistrates Court was established,
rather than a completely new court. The
division could be staffed by a rotating group
of magistrates wishing to practise there. Those
magistrates would regularly ‘rotate out’ to do
the day-to-day work of the court as well.
I expect legislation to be introduced later this
year after the trial presently being conducted
at Southport concludes, and would certainly
appreciate feedback from the profession as
to this particular issue – or indeed any of the
report’s numerous recommendations.
Ian Walker
Shadow Attorney-General
Ian.walker@parliament.qld.gov.au
248,206
HOURS
That’s roughly how long we have spent
perfecting the art of legal costing...
give or take the odd hour or two...
some days it feels like more
Save yourself time and reap the benefits
of our extensive experience while you
focus on your practice
www.dgt.com.au
Brisbane: Suite 48, Level 4, 101 Wickham Terrace, Spring Hill, QLD, 4000
DX: 307 Brisbane E: costing@dgt.com.au P: (07) 3834 3359
back to contents